Appellate Section

FREEDOM OF ACCESS TO CLINIC ENTRANCES ACT

• United States v. Alaw (D.C. Cir.) -- Appellee
  • Whether the district court erred in finding that Defendants were sufficiently likely to violate the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, 18 U.S.C. 248 (Access Act), in the future to warrant issuing an injunction
  • Whether injunctive relief under the Access Act must be predicated upon pervasive, egregious, unlawful conduct
  • Whether injunctive relief is prohibited if civil penalties are available to deter future illegal conduct
  • Whether the injunction issued on remand violates the First Amendment because it prohibits otherwise lawful expressive conduct
  • Whether the district court was required by the First Amendment to prohibit only acts committed with the mens rea necessary to prove a violation of the Access Act
  • Whether the injunction is unconstitutionally overbroad because it is not tailored to each covered facility
  • Whether the injunction is unconstitutional because it does not permit Defendants to sit, stand or kneel alone in front of the entrances of covered facilities
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [PDF]	10/22/02
  Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 327 F.3d 1217	05/06/03

• United States v. Alaw (D.C. Cir.) -- Appellee
  • Defendants' conduct violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
  • Injunction issued to enforce FACE does not violate the First Amendment
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [HTML]  [PDF]	11/27/00
  Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 247 F.3d 279	05/01/01

• United States v. Gregg (3d Cir.) -- Appellant/cross-appellee
  • Defendants are individually, not jointly and severally, liable under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act for statutory damages of $5,000 per violation
  • FACE is a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause
  • FACE does not violate the First Amendment
  • FACE is not vague or overbroad
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellant/Cross-Appellee [HTML][PDF]	10/06/99
  Reply Brief [HTML]  [PDF]	12/13/99
  Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 226 F.3d 253	09/07/00
  Opposition to Petition for Certiorari [HTML]  [PDF]	03/12/01
  Certiorari denied, reported at 532 U.S. 971	04/15/01

• United States v. Hart (8th Cir.) -- Appellee
  • FACE is a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause
  • FACE does not violate the First Amendment
  • FACE is not vague or overbroad
  • Parking rental trucks at the entrance of abortion clinics could constitute a "threat of force," in violation of FACE
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [HTML]  [PDF]	06/19/99
  Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 212 F.3d 1067	05/01/00
  Brief Opposing Petition for Rehearing En Banc [HTML]  [PDF]	05/31/00
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc denied	06/16/00
  Opposition to Petition for Certiorari	12/13/00
  Petition for Certiorari denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1114	01/16/01